Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Requesting unprotection of User talk:Interlude65. (TW)
Requesting semi-protection of Knanaya. (TW)
Line 10: Line 10:
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}


==== {{la|Knanaya}} ====
'''Temporary semi-protection:''' The article, which is subject to [[WP:GS|sanctions]], is currently receiving poor contributions from uncommunicative anons. The probles include those listed [[User_talk:117.201.199.208#Knanaya|here]] and also in various discussions on the talk page. Some are clearly moving between IPs. [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush|talk]]) 15:23, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
==== {{lu|Interlude65}} ====
==== {{lu|Interlude65}} ====
'''Indefinite semi-protection:''' Well, now I've realized I've made a mistake fully retiring from Wikipedia, and I need to edit my user page saying that I am active on Wikipedia but not a lot. [[User:Interlude65|<font color="red">'''Interlude 65'''</font>]] 15:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
'''Indefinite semi-protection:''' Well, now I've realized I've made a mistake fully retiring from Wikipedia, and I need to edit my user page saying that I am active on Wikipedia but not a lot. [[User:Interlude65|<font color="red">'''Interlude 65'''</font>]] 15:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:23, 10 July 2012

"WP:RFP" and "WP:RPP" redirect here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for permissions, Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, or Wikipedia:Random page patrol.
    Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.
    Shortcuts

    Before requesting, read the protection policy. Full protection is used to stop edit warring between multiple users or to prevent vandalism to high-risk templates; semi-protection and pending changes are usually used to prevent IP and new user vandalism (see the rough guide to semi-protection); and move protection is used to stop pagemove revert wars. Extended confirmed protection is used where semi-protection has proved insufficient (see the rough guide to extended confirmed protection)

    After a page has been protected, it is listed in the page history and logs with a short rationale, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. In the case of full protection due to edit warring, admins should not revert to specific versions of the page, except to get rid of obvious vandalism.

    Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
    Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level
    Request a specific edit to a protected page
    Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
    this header: view • edit


    Current requests for protection

    Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    Temporary semi-protection: The article, which is subject to sanctions, is currently receiving poor contributions from uncommunicative anons. The probles include those listed here and also in various discussions on the talk page. Some are clearly moving between IPs. Sitush (talk) 15:23, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: Well, now I've realized I've made a mistake fully retiring from Wikipedia, and I need to edit my user page saying that I am active on Wikipedia but not a lot. Interlude 65 15:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Floquenbeam (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Indef semi Could I get User talk:Floquenbeam semi-protected, please? I won't be editing for the foreseeable future, so IP's/new editors don't need to be able to leave messages there, and I appear to have made an enemy. If I return, I'll have it unprotected. --Floquenstein's monster (talk) 15:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Armbrust/Archive 11 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Indefinite full protection: User request within own userspace. A talk page archive, which doesn't need to be edited. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 14:10, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Maurice07 made 5 reverts in a day. Admin assisstance required to deal with the user. E4024 (talk) 14:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit warring between several registered users. ★ Oliverlyc ★ ✈✈✈ Pop me a message! 14:01, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit warring between IP user and registered user. ★ Oliverlyc ★ ✈✈✈ Pop me a message! 13:52, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Recent edits are vandalism from IP--ACisamazing (talk) 12:10, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: I think blocking the IP would be a better idea. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 12:32, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Nearly all recent edits have been nonconstructive IP edits. Subject is a living person. Looks like a very high percentage of the IP edits are vandalism. Arg342 (talk) 11:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: vandalism from ip. Mrutyunjaya Kar (talk) 11:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Although infrequently vandalized it seems like page is a popular target. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 07:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

    Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Jasper Deng (talk) 04:24, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Several of us are getting tired of HandsomeFella changing the lead daily. Could we get maybe a week of full protection at this April-July version? With Wimbledon over maybe it will blow over or talk will ensue by that time. Maybe not, but I think it's worth a try. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    • Eh, any reason why you're not talking right now? "Several of us" means you and one other editor. This edit war is so silly that I don't even want to protect this article. Talk it out. Drmies (talk) 18:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    We tried at an ani. No go. It was sitting at a position since April and now in July it is being changed. I had put forth 5 different alternatives at the ani and on other talk pages. I thought maybe in a week... but, oh well, thanks for taking the time to at least look at it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Drmies, the essay WP:TENNISNAMES was broadly discussed in RfC and resoundingly rejected. User Fyunck has added this "Foreign name known as tennis name" formula to over 100x BLP ledes counter to the example François Mitterrand used twice in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies/WP:OPENPARA&WP:FULLNAME. (I counted 110x BLPs at one point using Google). The first one seems to be Saša Hiršzon. As per the edit history of Saša Hiršzon Fyunck has repeatedly been reminded of the result of WP:TENNISNAMES and WP:OPENPARA by I count over a dozen other editors, but will edit to ensure his tennis-lede-formula stays in the article. Anyone here on Requests for page protection who doubts this is welcome to try editing the lede per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies style and see what happens. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:10, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite move-protection Recently removed with no reason; highly-visible page. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 16:44, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) I don't see any reason for move protection in the logs. Article was never moved. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 17:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    "10:59, 14 June 2008 Acalamari (talk | contribs) changed protection level of Rihanna (Grawp target [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop]) (hist) ". Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.
    Move protection shouldn't uses pre-emptively. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 17:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Move-protection was used because the WP:FILTER catched a long-term vandal. Please inform yourself. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 17:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Question: I'm not sure why this request has been made, the logs show the article has been indefinitely move protected since July 4. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: ‎[move=autoconfirmed] := Every autoconfirmed user can move the page. If it were move-protected, than it would be [move=sysyop]. (Although unnecessary.) Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 18:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    While you see "unnecessary" protection, I see +4,000 + +24,000 reasons to do so. While you claim that "pages are not protected-pre-emptively, a WP:PP rule, you are ignoring deliberately the WP:MOVP clause: "Highly visible pages that have no reason to be moved". Both Colorado and Rihanna are WP:PRIMARYTOPICs and widely visited pages, thus, they are in risk to be moved to nonsense stuff like ""Ì-ÌERMY?", this or S·ſAGGĖR, or many other pages that were moved or intended to be moved by Grawp but they triggered the filter log. Please do not act as a robot, or pretend to be an admin, and for the third time, learn to ignore all rules, especially when do not hurt the project, and their absence damages the project. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Interesting to the "pretending to be an admin"-bit in your comment is, that you relisted the pages, and the reviewing admin said: "One case of page move vandalism which was swiftly reverted. WP:MOVP does not normally allow indefinite move-protection simply on grounds of a lack of reason to move. Both pages have had their pages moved for valid reasons in the past and could do so again.. In this case there wasn't even one page move. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 19:45, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I re-listed two out of three pages that a non-admin (you) contested, and to admin eyes declined, and let no real admins to make the comment. User:CT Cooper did a valid decline as Smallville (TV series) and Thirty Seconds to Mars are valid enough to make a move. 40 Seconds to Uranus + 40 Seconds to Mars + Smellyville were the page-move vandalism that "wasn't even" exist, as you said. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Tbhotch asked me to comment here. It is true that I move-protected Rihanna years ago as a result of Grawp, and obviously the move-protection remained. I won't re-implement my old protection for obvious reasons, but as Rihanna is an extremely high profile figure I can't see any reason to move this page (Grawp is gone, but what possible reason could someone have to move the page now?): I see no issues with someone re-instating the move-protection. Also see my comment below for Colorado. Acalamari 19:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite move-protection Recently removed. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 16:44, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) I don't see any reason for move protection in the logs. Article was never moved. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 17:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Please tell me, do you see any good reason to move this page? Please learn to WP:IAR. This is not the first time you've done this, and in the past you've declined my requests even though you are not an admin. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.
    Following this logic, most of the pages don't need moving. Also that the page isn't move-protected doesn't "prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia". Also move protection shouldn't uses pre-emptively. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 17:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you have a problem with the "move protection shouldn't uses pre-emptively"? Please stop WP:POINTing Wikipedia, if an admin declined your requests under that rationale is not my problem. The page has been move-protected since 2008. Learn the Grandfather clause and to, again, ignoring all rules. Also, there is a good reason to move Jerry Lewis, Javier Hernández Balcázar, and many others, but I'm not requesting move-protection, am I? Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 17:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I said most, and not every. Also I never requested move protection for any page. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 17:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I can't even remember why I gave this article move-protection. However, as with Rihanna above there is no reason to move Colorado to another name so I can't see the harm in restoring the move-protection (again, I'll let someone else re-implement it, though). Tbhotch is not requesting pre-emptive move-protection in either of these cases because the protection was already there for years. Acalamari 19:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: match protection with Template:Centralized discussion, which uses it. benzband (talk) 10:56, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary Semi-protection: Many IPs adding rubbish box office numbers to the article. zeeyanketu (talk) 13.29 , 9 July 2012 (UTC)

    Rajakeeya Maha Vidyalaya, Telijjawila (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    Royal College Panadura (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    Polonnaruwa Rajakeeya Madya Maha Vidyalaya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    Ranabima Royal College (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Temporary protection requested: I don't really care if it's semi-protection or full protection. But this article, along with Rajakeeya Maha Vidyalaya, Telijjawila, Royal College Panadura, Polonnaruwa Rajakeeya Madya Maha Vidyalaya, and Ranabima Royal College have had longterm edit wars between an offensive and harassing IP editor and a registered editor over the proper name of the schools. I don't know if the registered editor (User:Cossde) is correct, but I do know that when the IP edit wars, it's through open proxies, and usually includes attacks against Cossde at the same time. Because I personally have no idea what the names should be, I've opened a centralized RfC on WT:WikiProject Schools. I'd like all of the pages to be either temporarily or fully protected until the RfC is over, because we need to sort this out, and we need people to actually comment in the RfC. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:22, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection Persistent BLP violations. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 17:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    • Blocked one IP, warned that Amal user. Next time they do that, have them blocked for BLP violations; if it's an IP, maybe come back here and/or ask for a range block. Drop me a line if needs be. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    User(s) blocked. (tagging for script) Rami R 11:22, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection for perhaps a week or two. An anonymous editor using various IP addresses is attempting to make a POINT by changing the flags of Red Star Belgrade and FK Partizan from the Yugoslavian flag (which was correct at the time of context) to the anachronistic Serbian flag. Various editors have requested that this activity be stopped, but to no avail. – PeeJay 21:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rami R 11:17, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism from several IP's. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 09:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rami R 10:40, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 07:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rami R 10:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of constant IP vandalism. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 07:22, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rami R 10:44, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – ongoing vandalism by IPs and single purpose new accounts. William Thweatt TalkContribs 05:48, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rami R 10:49, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editors keep inserting a popular actress' name in the "Cast" section as playing the part of the horse. Manway 02:02, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rami R 10:59, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Anderson9990 - what's up? 23:25, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rami R 11:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - as in 2013 and beyond in film, blatantly unsourced material is added. Freshh (talk) 22:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rami R 11:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for unprotection

    Shortcuts

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.

    • To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
    • Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
    • Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
    • If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.

    Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    User talk:Interlude65 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Unprotection: Same reason as to unlock my user page. Interlude 65 15:20, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    The disputes has ended, so it's pretty much worthless for the file to be protected.--Plea$ant 1623 11:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Shortcut

    Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

    • Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
    • Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
    • Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
    • If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
    • This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.

    Both this article and its talk section are Semi-protected. The article contains a section titled "Controversial Views On Rape", with a quote from a tumblr blog post and nothing further. I believe that "controversial views on rape" is misleading; the artist in question's entire act revolves around making shocking statements about taboo issues, none of them are presented as views. Furthermore, the source is rather unreliable. I am requesting that the "Controversial Views on Rape" section be removed from the article on the grounds that it is misleading and irrelevant. VoidSkipper (talk) 06:31, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=501572829"